DEMANDA Y OFERTA DE SERVICIOS HOSPITALARIOS

The study of economics has been a source of intrigue and inquiry dating from pre- Biblical times to the present day. Throughout this time, the main inquiry arising from economics has been the search for wealth and its accumulation.17 Currently, this is portrayed by the satisfaction that is derived via the consumption of resources. However as this chapter will illustrate, this has not always been the case. In fact, the wealth concept has constantly adapted to reflect periodic needs, primarily centred on wealth accumulation. This, Skousen (2001) claims, has in the last 250 years led to the creation of economic models that best serve this need. The ability to directly influence outcomes via economic models meant that the economics discipline underwent a transformation from theory to application. This application of economic theory, this study argues, coincided with the recent phenomena of organising and utilising resources with the aim of satisfying individual consumption at the expense of societal outcomes.

In Chapter 1, the present research outlined how Marshall had shifted the economic discourse from the cause to the mechanics of wealth creation, with wealth being created only through market exchanges (see Section 1.1). Consequently, the market became the central concept in all economic matters. While this conception of wealth is highly contestable, this study is in agreement with Marshall’s sentiment regarding the study of economics. Marshall claimed that before delving into economic inquiry it is important that:

17

As mentioned in Chapter 1, the term progress also implies wealth. The confluence of the terms is reiterated by Cummins et al. (2003, pp. 159-160), who state that, ‘the goodness of societies has been traditionally measured through wealth’.

The economist should know something of the history of manners and customs and laws and of the principles of mental, moral, legal and political science. He [the economist] must avoid the error of regarding the present experience of mankind as of universal validity, mistaking temporary or local phases of human character for human nature itself. (Marshall, 1879, p. 5)

It is for this reason, the current research asserts, that an analysis of the evolution of wealth and its measurement is important. This chapter will briefly trace the main protagonists who have contributed to defining and measuring wealth, starting from the Stone Age up until the present day. The intent is to illustrate the changing nature of knowledge production in forming crucial concepts, where different economic theories utilised different definitions and measurements of wealth. By demonstrating the contestable nature of knowledge production it permits this study to approach wealth measurement from a standpoint other than neoclassical.

2.2 Prehistoric Times

The Stone Age economy was characterised by what Sahlins (1974) termed the domestic mode of production. This meant that families made what they used themselves and notions of wealth accumulation were viewed as a hindrance. In those times, freedom of movement was the ultimate value. Consequently, production occurred only for its use- value. Once needs were met, production stopped since there was no reason to produce a surplus.

However as Sahlins (1974) points out, it would be wrong to assume that wants were restricted, desires restrained, or even that the notion of wealth was limited. To assume this implies that the hunters and gatherers had curbed their materialistic impulses, rather than, as Sahlins argues, they simply never made an institution of them.

Marx reflected these differences in conception to the industrial age by declaring:

How sublime seems the ancient conception that made man the objective of production, in comparison with a modern world where production is the objective of man – and wealth the objective of production. (Marx, cited in Sahlins, 1974, p. 84)

The Bronze Age distinguishes itself from the Stone Age with the onset of specialisation, involving the making of goods for trade or exchange (Earle, 2002). Here, wealth took

the form of status-defining objects, which Earle described as prestige-goods exchange. It is important to note that most communities in this era were largely charcterised by an absence of exchange. Consequently, wealth remained scarce during these times as it was not valued very highly due to its low use-value.

2.3 The Ancient Hebrews

Although wealth analysis was not the central concern of the Old Testament, Wheeler (1995) nevertheless argues that four themes were identified regarding wealth. Firstly, wealth was associated with unfaithfulness to God. Secondly, wealth accumulation was viewed as the fruit of injustice. Thirdly, wealth was seen as the blessing on the faithful; and finally, wealth was seen as a reward of labour. In addition, Liebermann (1979) posits, Talmudic authorities recognised three functions of money: to facilitate exchange, accumulate wealth and to serve as a standardised unit of account.

The Old Testament therefore regarded wealth as a blessing but forbade its accumulation. These systems of philosophy from which such isolated economic statements formed part, Roll (1992) claims, shaped how wealth was to be studied. However not all of their teachings took hold. Despite passages in the Bible to the contrary, the development of private property continued. With it came trade, both domestic and international, and the possibilities of accumulating wealth were boundless.